“One China, two Taiwans” is a concept that was proposed by some academics several years ago. While the “one China” view is getting stronger, the “two Taiwans” has become adrift following the “rise” of China.
Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) was wined and dined by former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), and pro-unification groups and people from the corporate sector also welcomed his visit last week. This is one of the two Taiwans.
On the other hand, Chen could not go to southern Taiwan and was in effect grounded in Taipei. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) staged protests and besieged the hotel where Chen was staying. Demonstrators tied protest ribbons around their heads and carried national flags. This is the other Taiwan. Under the shadow of “one China,” the “two Taiwans” failed to communicate with each other and were wary of each other, as if the real enemy for each of them were not in China, but in Taiwan.
Beijing has remained consistent in its “one China” policy, but has become much more flexible in its application. The Chinese government grasped the strategic advantage of the KMT’s return to power in May to confine the future development of Taiwan through various agreements signed by both sides. The KMT and the Chinese Communist Party have agreed to accelerate cross-strait talks within a short period of time, with the chairmen of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and ARATS holding talks twice this year.
This appears to contravene the Agreement on the Establishment of Systematic Liaison and Communication Channels between the SEF and the ARATS (兩岸聯繫與會談制度協議) signed at the talks between former SEF chairman Koo Chen-fu (辜振甫) and former ARATS chairman Wang Daohan (汪道涵) in Singapore in 1993, which stipulated that vice chairmen, rather than the chairmen, of both agencies should meet twice every year. SEF Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) and his ARATS counterpart said that they would expedite cross-strait relations despite voices of dissent within Taiwan. They were not deterred by a recent public opinion poll conducted by Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council that showed 30 percent of respondents worried that cross-strait exchanges were being pushed ahead too fast.
The agreements signed during this second round of talks between Chiang and Chen in regards to aviation routes, direct sea transportation links and postal services herald the arrival of the “major three links” era across the Taiwan Strait. The “three links”— direct postal sercices, transportation and trade — proposed by China in 1979 have finally come true. Article 95 of the Act Governing Relations Between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (兩岸人民關係條例) stipulates that “the competent authorities shall request the consent of the Legislative Yuan before permitting direct business transactions or direct sea or air transportation between the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area.”
But the wording of the agreements says that they will take effect 40 days after being signed.
Meanwhile, the distance between Taiwan’s ruling and opposition parties seems farther than that between Taipei and Beijing.
The conflict between the pan-green camp and the pan-blue camp did not end after the presidential election, and cross-strait relations are the main focus of contention between the two parties. While welcoming Chen’s visit, the KMT has actually widened the gap between the “two Taiwans.”
Lin Cheng-yi is a research fellow at the Institute of European and American Studies at Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
Taiwan is a small, humble place. There is no Eiffel Tower, no pyramids — no singular attraction that draws the world’s attention. If it makes headlines, it is because China wants to invade. Yet, those who find their way here by some twist of fate often fall in love. If you ask them why, some cite numbers showing it is one of the freest and safest countries in the world. Others talk about something harder to name: The quiet order of queues, the shared umbrellas for anyone caught in the rain, the way people stand so elderly riders can sit, the
Taiwan’s fall would be “a disaster for American interests,” US President Donald Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of defense for policy Elbridge Colby said at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday last week, as he warned of the “dramatic deterioration of military balance” in the western Pacific. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is indeed facing a unique and acute threat from the Chinese Communist Party’s rising military adventurism, which is why Taiwan has been bolstering its defenses. As US Senator Tom Cotton rightly pointed out in the same hearing, “[although] Taiwan’s defense spending is still inadequate ... [it] has been trending upwards
After the coup in Burma in 2021, the country’s decades-long armed conflict escalated into a full-scale war. On one side was the Burmese army; large, well-equipped, and funded by China, supported with weapons, including airplanes and helicopters from China and Russia. On the other side were the pro-democracy forces, composed of countless small ethnic resistance armies. The military junta cut off electricity, phone and cell service, and the Internet in most of the country, leaving resistance forces isolated from the outside world and making it difficult for the various armies to coordinate with one another. Despite being severely outnumbered and
After the confrontation between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Friday last week, John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, discussed this shocking event in an interview. Describing it as a disaster “not only for Ukraine, but also for the US,” Bolton added: “If I were in Taiwan, I would be very worried right now.” Indeed, Taiwanese have been observing — and discussing — this jarring clash as a foreboding signal. Pro-China commentators largely view it as further evidence that the US is an unreliable ally and that Taiwan would be better off integrating more deeply into
RSS